Digital Consciousness, Big Tech, and the Future of Education: A Philosophical and Practical Re-evaluation
Introduction
We are in the midst of a human crisis—one driven by the rapid expansion of digital consciousness, the monopolization of knowledge by Big Tech, and the erosion of critical, teacher-centered education. Artificial intelligence, once a tool for augmenting human intelligence, is increasingly presented as a potential substitute for human cognition. At the same time, digital environments are being shaped by corporate and governmental forces that censor, surveil, and manipulate public discourse. In education, these forces are eroding traditional learning structures, devaluing the role of the human teacher, and replacing deep engagement with algorithm-driven content consumption.
To navigate this crisis, we must re-evaluate our understanding of digital consciousness and AI. This requires drawing from a range of philosophical perspectives, including the work of Federico Faggin, Bernardo Kastrup, Joscha Bach, and Ernst Cassirer, while also addressing the role of Big Tech in shaping digital environments. Ultimately, the solution lies in restoring a teacher-centered approach to education, where AI functions as an interactive tool rather than a replacement for human guidance.
Philosophical Foundations of Consciousness and AI
Federico Faggin: Consciousness as Fundamental
Faggin, known for his role in the development of the microprocessor, has moved beyond computing to explore the nature of consciousness. He argues that consciousness is not computational and cannot be replicated by AI. Instead, he suggests that consciousness is fundamental to reality, not an emergent property of neural networks or digital systems. This perspective challenges the notion that AI can achieve self-awareness, a claim often promoted by Big Tech.
Bernardo Kastrup: Idealism and Digital Consciousness
Philosopher Bernardo Kastrup expands on this idea through metaphysical idealism, which posits that reality is fundamentally mental. Kastrup’s work suggests that what we perceive as the physical world—including digital systems—is a manifestation of consciousness itself. This raises important questions about AI’s role in shaping human perception. If digital environments are symbolic extensions of human consciousness, then Big Tech’s control over these environments has profound implications for education and society.
Joscha Bach: Computational Models of Mind
In contrast, cognitive scientist Joscha Bach provides a computationalist perspective, arguing that the mind operates like a complex information-processing system. He explores how AI can simulate cognition, reasoning, and learning. While Bach acknowledges that AI lacks true subjective experience, he suggests that advanced AI can approximate certain cognitive functions. This is a crucial insight for education: AI can be an effective tool for interactive learning, but it does not replace human intuition, emotional intelligence, or ethical reasoning.
Ernst Cassirer: Symbols and Meaning in Human Knowledge
Cassirer’s work on symbols and human knowledge bridges these perspectives by emphasizing that humans do not interact with reality directly but through symbolic structures—language, mathematics, art, and culture. AI, at its core, is a symbol-processing system, but its inability to create new meaning autonomously highlights the limitations of computationalism. Education must recognize this difference, ensuring that AI enhances human symbolic reasoning rather than reducing learning to mere data processing.
Big Tech and the Digital Manipulation of Knowledge
While these philosophical perspectives shape our understanding of AI and consciousness, we must also confront the corporate and governmental control over digital environments. Today’s AI-driven platforms—social media, search engines, and online education systems—are not neutral tools. Instead, they are algorithmically controlled spaces that influence perception, discourse, and access to knowledge.
Surveillance and Data Extraction: Universities and students are increasingly subjected to data surveillance, where their digital interactions are tracked, analyzed, and monetized.
Censorship and Algorithmic Bias: Educational content is often filtered through corporate and governmental agendas, limiting exposure to diverse perspectives.
The Commodification of Learning: Knowledge is treated as a product, where engagement metrics and monetization take precedence over deep intellectual inquiry.
This manipulation has dire consequences for education. It fosters passive consumption over active learning, weakens critical thinking skills, and diminishes the role of the human teacher in favor of automated, AI-driven learning environments.
Education in the Age of AI: A Crisis and a Solution
Given these challenges, education must be re-centered around human relationships and teacher-guided learning. A purely AI-driven model of education, dictated by Big Tech, is insufficient and even dangerous. Instead, the solution lies in a teacher-centered approach, where:
The human teacher remains the foundation of education, providing wisdom, emotional intelligence, and ethical reasoning that AI cannot replicate.
Students, parents, and school administrations work together to create learning environments that prioritize human interaction over digital automation.
AI is used as a tool for interactive learning, not a replacement for human guidance—emphasizing a “learning by doing” approach where AI assists rather than dictates.
This hybrid model aligns with both ontogenetic development (how individual students learn) and phylogenetic development (how knowledge evolves culturally and historically). Rather than viewing AI as an autonomous educational entity, we should integrate it as a collaborative tool—one that enhances but does not replace human-led learning.
Conclusion
We are at a critical juncture where the trajectory of digital consciousness, AI, and education must be re-examined. Drawing from Faggin, Kastrup, Bach, and Cassirer, we see that AI, while powerful, lacks the fundamental consciousness and symbolic meaning-making capabilities that define human intelligence. Meanwhile, Big Tech’s control over digital environments threatens academic freedom, critical thinking, and democratic discourse.
The solution is not to reject AI outright but to integrate it responsibly—ensuring that education remains rooted in human relationships, teacher-guided learning, and active student engagement. By re-centering education around the human teacher and learner, while utilizing AI as an interactive tool, we can counteract digital manipulation and foster a more authentic, conscious, and critically engaged society.
Only through this re-evaluation of education and digital consciousness can we navigate the crisis at hand and reclaim learning as a deeply human experience.
